MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1939767867 · doi:10.1002/jcd.21315

The Asymptotic Existence of Resolvable Group Divisible Designs

2012· article· en· W1939767867 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Designs · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsPartition (number theory)CorollaryBlock (permutation group theory)Group (periodic table)GraphDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A group divisible design (GDD) is a triple which satisfies the following properties: (1) is a partition of X into subsets called groups; (2) is a collection of subsets of X , called blocks, such that a group and a block contain at most one element in common; and (3) every pair of elements from distinct groups occurs in a constant number λ blocks. This parameter λ is usually called the index. A k ‐GDD of type is a GDD with block size k , index , and u groups of size g . A GDD is resolvable if the blocks can be partitioned into classes such that each point occurs in precisely one block of each class. We denote such a design as an RGDD. For fixed integers and , we show that the necessary conditions for the existence of a k ‐RGDD of type are sufficient for all . As a corollary of this result and the existence of large resolvable graph decompositions, we establish the asymptotic existence of resolvable graph GDDs, G ‐RGDDs, whenever the necessary conditions for the existence of ‐RGDs are met. We also show that, with a few easy modifications, the techniques extend to general index. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Combin. Designs 21: 112–126, 2013

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it